Capital Update – For the Week Ending June 14, 2024
In this week’s National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) Friday recap: Senate Republicans release Farm Bill framework; House Appropriations fiscal 2025 ag funding bill debated; NPPC leads defense of producers’ freedom to farm; NPPC wants reciprocal access to South Africa, Nigeria; and U.S. pork exports surge in April. Take a deeper dive below.
Senate Republicans Release Farm Bill Framework
What happened: U.S. Senate Agriculture, Forestry, and Nutrition Committee Ranking Member John Boozman (R-AR) released the Republicans’ framework for the next farm bill. It incorporates all of NPPC’s farm bill priorities, including a provision to fix the problems caused by California’s Proposition 12.
In addition to addressing Prop. 12 — which bans the sale in California of pork from hogs born to sows that aren’t raised in housing that meets the state’s arbitrary standards — Boozman’s plan calls for funding U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs related to preparing for and preventing foreign animal diseases (FADs), promoting U.S. exports, and eradicating feral swine. It would authorize the National Detector Dog Training Center, which trains canines used at U.S. ports of entry to detect agricultural contraband, and permanently approve faster harvest line speeds at meatpacking plants.
In related news, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack last week said of Prop. 12, “Every state has the right to regulate the activities of farmers within their state borders. Where there’s disagreement is whether states have the right or the ability to extend their view about how livestock should be raised to farmers in other states.” Vilsack has made similar remarks supportive of a Prop. 12 fix before the Senate and House Agriculture Committees this year.
Boozman’s plan will need to be considered with the framework that Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) issued in March. While much of that measure focuses on conservation, farm loans, nutrition programs, and rural development, it does include several of the same provisions that are in Boozman’s framework. But Stabenow’s measure also has problematic provisions relating to the Packers and Stockyards Act and voluntary U.S. origin labeling claims for USDA Food Safety Inspection Service products.
In May, the House Agriculture Committee passed its farm bill, which included 100% of NPPC’s priorities.
NPPC’s take: NPPC strongly supports Sen. Boozman’s farm bill framework and is urging swift passage of an agricultural blueprint that addresses California Prop. 12, FADs, feral swine eradication, export promotion, detector dog training, and harvest line speeds. NPPC also is encouraging House lawmakers to move their farm bill to the floor soon for consideration.
Why it matters: The five-year farm bill sets farm, conservation, forestry, and nutrition policy and authorizes various agricultural programs, including ones related to FAD preparation and prevention and export promotion.
House Appropriations Fiscal 2025 Ag Funding Bill Debated
What happened: The House Appropriations Committee’s agriculture subcommittee considered a fiscal 2025 funding bill for USDA, the Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies.
Among NPPC priority agricultural issues addressed in the nearly $26 billion spending legislation are ones that would:
- Fund programs related to preparing for and preventing FADs, including for the National Animal Health Laboratory Network, the National Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Program, the National Veterinary Stockpile, and the National Animal Vaccine and Veterinary Countermeasures Bank.
- Block a series of USDA regulations, including the “Inclusive Competition and Market Integrity under the Packers and Stockyards Act” (PSA), which increases the risk of frivolous litigation.
- Fund the Market Access Program (MAP) and the Foreign Market Development (FMD) program, both of which promote U.S. agricultural exports.
NPPC’s take: NPPC backs funding in the agriculture appropriations legislation for programs that support farmers, including ones that improve preparation for and prevention of FADs and that help promote U.S. exports. It also supports efforts to repeal a series of PSA rules that would negatively affect producers buying and selling livestock — including increasing the risk of litigation, resulting in chilling effects on competitive opportunities.
Why it matters: The annual agriculture appropriations law funds federal programs that support farmers, including farm loans, agricultural research, and ones related to preventing and preparing for FADs.
NPPC Leads Defense of Producers’ Freedom to Farm
What happened: NPPC led livestock and farm groups in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to fight back against activist attacks on pork producers’ fundamental due process rights and the regulatory foundation of modern livestock production.
Earlier this year, a large number of national and state activist groups, led by Food & Water Watch (including Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement and the North Carolina Environmental Justice Network) filed a lawsuit before the Court against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Biden Administration.
These groups seek fundamental changes to EPA’s concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) rules, including that the law should presume pig and other livestock farmers are discharging pollutants into Waters of the United States (WOTUS) in violation of the Clean Water Act. They have asked the court to remove application of the long established and congressionally developed exemption for agricultural stormwater from animal feeding operations and instead require all CAFOs to either obtain Clean Water Act permits or provide evidence that they are not discharging into a WOTUS.
If successful, this lawsuit would upend livestock environmental regulations around the country, causing millions of dollars of lawsuits, fines, and challenges — setting the industry back decades.
NPPC, along with the American Farm Bureau Federation, the U.S. Poultry and Egg Federation, and the United Egg Producers, have intervened in the litigation in defense of the Biden Administration and the long-standing regulations that have shaped modern pig farming.
The farm groups filed their opening brief defending EPA, its longstanding CAFO rules, and the important victories that NPPC secured before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in 2005 and before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010 to defend the integrity of modern pig farming.
NPPC’s take: The pork industry has decades of success in addressing environmental challenges. Pork producers are leaders in maximizing the efficient use of valuable manure resources to continuously improve on-farm performance and sustainability.
Pork producers have a long, successful working relationship with federal, state, and local regulators to ensure their farms are constructed and maintained as zero-discharge operations. Major changes to long-standing federal laws can only come from congressional action, and it is inappropriate for these activist groups to seek to rewrite federal law through the courts when Congress has consistently rejected their outlandish demands.
Why it matters: This baseless lawsuit, filed by extreme activists, seeks to upend livestock production. By attacking core notions of due process and fundamental civil rights, these activists and their financial backers in national class-action law firms seek to put pork producers around the country at risk of the same types of unfounded predatory lawsuits that previously caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damages to livestock farmers just a few years ago.
NPPC Wants Reciprocal Access to South Africa and Nigeria
What happened: NPPC pushes for the renewal of U.S. trade preference programs like the African Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA) but with conditions including enhanced enforcement that would aim to remove ongoing “unwarranted, non-scientific” restrictions on U.S. pork, South Africa and Nigeria , said NPPC in written testimony submitted to the House Ways and Means Committee. On Wednesday, the panel held a hearing on the program, which is up for renewal in 2025.
AGOA gives imports from sub-Saharan African countries duty-free access to the United States but, as a condition of eligibility, beneficiary nations must give U.S. products “reasonable and equitable” access to their markets. The program also helps expand U.S. trade and investment in Africa, stimulate economic growth, and facilitate sub-Saharan Africa’s integration into the global economy.
South Africa has several restrictions that are inconsistent with U.S. and international standards and limit U.S. pork imports, including:
- No market access for pork offal, heat-treated/canned products, and casings.
- Freezing requirements on U.S. pork related to trichinae, which is not present in U.S. commercial pork production.
- Limits on pork cuts because of unfounded concerns related to Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) and the pseudorabies virus (PRV).
While Nigeria began allowing pork sausage imports from the United States in early 2022, it has maintained a prohibition on the importation of raw pork, as well as on beef, poultry, and associated products.
Why it matters: South Africa and Nigeria, the top two beneficiaries of AGOA, should be better markets for U.S. pork. South Africa’s net pork imports average about 9% of the country’s consumption, but almost none of that comes from the United States, even though America accounts for around 30% of the global pork trade. In 2023, the United States exported just 313 metric tons of pork, valued at $718,000, to South Africa. Nigeria has the potential to import $26 million of U.S. pork annually, given its rapidly growing population of 236 million people and increasing protein-consumption trends.
U.S. Pork Exports Surge in April
What happened: Exports of U.S. pork in April were the largest in three years, with volume of nearly 278,000 metric tons (MT), 14% higher than last year, and value of almost $779 million, 18% higher than April 2023, according to the latest data released by the USDA and compiled by the U.S. Meat Export Federation. January through April pork export volume increased 8% over the same period last year to 1.04 million MT, while value was up 10% to $2.89 billion.
April pork exports to Mexico, the No. 1 foreign destination for U.S. pork, rebounded from their sluggish March numbers, climbing 34% in volume from a year ago to a record 107,594 MT and 61% in value to a record $240.5 million.
Other markets that saw strong export growth in April were South Korea, which took 26,286 MT valued at $88.9 million, up 23% and 33%, respectively, from a year ago, and Central America, which imported 14,769 MT valued at $44.2 million, increases of 50% and 55% compared with 2023. Exports to Australia and New Zealand also saw substantial growth in April, totaling 8,950 MT valued at $31.1 million, up 33% and 36%, respectively, from a year ago. The countries of the ASEAN, led by the Philippines, Malaysia, and Vietnam, took 7,669 MT valued at $16.3 million, up 15% and 7%, respectively, over 2023. Even exports to Japan were up from last April, with volume at 34,569 MT valued at $138.7 million, increases of 3% and 5%, respectively, and the largest amounts in two years.
U.S. pork exports to China/Hong Kong continued to trend lower, with export volume in the first four months falling to 154,403 MT, 15% below the same period in 2023, and value dropping by 23% to $363.7 million.
Why it matters: Pork exports in April equated to $72.46 in value from each hog marketed, the third-highest amount on record. The January-April average was $66.28, an increase of 6.5% from the same period a year ago. Exports accounted for 28.3% of total April pork production, the highest since May 2021. For January through April, exports accounted for 26.1% of total production, up 1.7% over the same period in 2023.